EPA Rating for 60kWh: 200 miles range. Achievable?

200 miles appears to be the current sweet spot for Elon. Based on this I believe Tesla will try very hard to be sure the 60kWh Model X achieves this. And successful no doubt. Being less aerodynamic than the Model S and likely heavier, it will be challenging to reach 200 miles range when the Model S with the 60kWh battery is rated at 208 miles range. Options like the 19" Michelin Primacy Tire upgrade and Aero wheels if standard on the X will help but I wonder what other improvements will be made on the X to reach so 200 miles range is achievable? AWD provides some great possibilities but since that will be an option will there be ratings for the X with and without AWD?

What else will Tesla engineer into the Model X to be sure the rating exceeds 200 miles range?
-Cameras instead of mirrors

It's 208, to be specific. But why would Tesla make this their goal for the X? Seems arbitrary. I wouldn't expect it to be more efficient than the S, and thus it will get a little bit less range, assuming they stick with the same battery capacity.

It's 208, to be specific. But why would Tesla make this their goal for the X? Seems arbitrary. I wouldn't expect it to be more efficient than the S, and thus it will get a little bit less range, assuming they stick with the same battery capacity.

Click to expand...

My only point is I don't see Elon producing the model X without an EPA rating of at least 200 miles ranges based. That being said without a larger battery or other changes the X won't meet EPA rated 200 miles range. My question is what is your best guess on what Tesla will do to meet and exceed 200?

My only point is I don't see Elon producing the model X without an EPA rating of at least 200 miles ranges based. That being said without a larger battery or other changes the X won't meet EPA rated 200 miles range. My question is what is your best guess on what Tesla will do to meet and exceed 200?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure it'll be too bad anyway since the EPA test average speed is relatively low. If anything it'd be the other way round and they'd be concerned about real-world range.

Obviously aerodynamics, top and bottom.
Air suspension in base model. Maximize air suspension range. Ground clearance is much less likely to be a problem in long-distance driving, even in winter. And when it is snowy people drive more slowly anyway. Having a fixed high ground clearance just for snowy months is a huge waste of energy.
Maybe increase base capacity slightly if they get desperate.

I don't see the exact EPA number being that big a deal. Tesla will probably aim for the "Tesla range" to be above 200 (which should be achievable with little to no changes), but they don't seem to care as much about the EPA number (for example the "Tesla range" for the Model S was above 300, but the EPA was only 265).

So I don't see them really having the need to change the pack, which affects economy of scale, from the Model S version (unless there's a similar pack upgrade for the Model S, but it seems Tesla is taking 7 year cycle for major upgrades, so this is unlikely).

And the suggestions to make air suspension, aero wheels, etc as standard on the base model will affect their margins (esp. given their margins are much lower on the base model in the first place). That is unless they raise the price, which I think most people prefer them not to just to push the range of the car above some arbitrary number.

Ignore me if this was mentioned elsewhere--- but has anyone heard whether or not the X is supposed to be full-time AWD?

I would think an electric drivetrain would lend itself to being switched manually from 2wd to AWD depending on the driver's assessment of need/conditions. I love my Subaru-- but I have no doubt the MPG would be better if 90% of the time I could run it 2 wheel drive only.